[throwaway81523]

They collect the organs from people who have just died, such as in car crashes. In the paperwork for getting a California driver license, you check a box saying whether you are willing to be an organ donor. If you check yes and you are later killed in a crash, they immediately bring your remains to a hospital that is always awaiting such deliveries, and a transplant operation gets going right away.

Motorcycles are sometimes called "donorcycles" because of the high likelihood that any given crash will be fatal, and that the rider is young and healthy and thus a highly desirable source of transplant material.

[NoImmatureAdHom]

It's important to understand that there are some very strong selection biases here in the U.S.

While fatalities per passenger-mile may be 24x cars (as below), you have to realize that the population riding motorcycles in the U.S. is not a random sampling. These people aren't trying to get around, they're acting out an image. For that behavior I don't blame them, but it is what it is.

Anecdotally, a little less than half of U.S. motorcyclists are fat, bald, drunk dudes riding Harleys or Harley look-alikes with the legal minimum protective gear (which in some states is none at all), while another little less than half are young, shirtless dudes on sportbikes. To their credit, they are wearing full-face helmets (because you can't go 200mph without one). Also, something like half of motorcycle fatalities involve alcohol[0]. Yikes.

<10% of motorcyclists are riding reasonable, well-maintained bikes with a modicum of skill and all of the proper protective gear.

So while motorcycling qua motorcycling may be more dangerous than driving a car per vehicle-mile, the difference is probably a lot smaller when controlling for differences in the behavior of people doing it. To put it in perspective, in the U.S., if motorcycling is ~30x deaths per vehicle mile compared to cars, bicycling is ~20x (though you do get exercise, which extends your life). And miles per motorcycle (or bicycle) are << miles per car per year in the U.S. People don't realize, but moving to the suburbs and driving everywhere vs. living in the city is taking the same sort of risk one might by motorcycling. </rant>

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcycle_safety

[btilly]

People needing organ donations are sometimes told to move to Florida.

Florida motorcyclists are not generally required to wear helmets. Therefore they more efficiently get to the "donor" stage.

[hyperpallium2]

A friend studying prosthetics told me half the recipients are motorcyclists.

Riding a motorbike is amazing fun, but if you ride long enough, something terrible will happen. Every rider has a story of an accident. Although you are more manoeuvrable than a car, can get out ahead of traffic, are smaller, can see more, and are more keenly alert... a little tap you'd hardly notice in a car can kill you.

[AmericanChopper]

A doctor friend of mine would joke about it being good organ transplant weather when it was raining, because they’d get dead motorcyclists turning up in the rain so frequently.

[Causality1]

It's rather astonishing that all the safety regulations for cars manage to exist in the same legal system that allows motorcycles on public roads at all. Last I read the death risk ratio was about 24x.

[JohnBooty]

Surely it's because: on a motorcycle you usually only hurt yourself?

In a car you tend to hurt other people including any kids, etc that may be along for the ride.

[Causality1]

More likely it's just because cycles existed before the safety regulations and there would be too much backlash to banning them. Plenty of other things that only harm yourself, like drugs or unpasteurized milk are also illegal.

[taneq]

I’m still amazed by this one. My first thought on riding a 250 was “how is this possibly legal?” And then the jump to a big bore (non-cruiser) is completely insane.

[_carbyau_]

As a motorcycle rider (every day commuter) I often think that if motorcycles didn't already exist, they wouldn't be allowed to.

As per sibling comment, maybe the only reason they are tolerated is that the risk is statistically largely to the rider themselves.

IE the person taking the risk is largely the target of the consequences.

If motorcycles somehow magically penetrated into peoples cars in a crash I think people would rule them out pretty quick.

[mechanical_bear]

> called “donorcycles”

Only by ghouls.

[_carbyau_]

As a rider, I too dislike people labelling me as having a deathwish. Clearly, I do not.

But calling names the other way won't help and I can see why the donorcycle term has stuck. There is enough of an element of truth to make it stick.